Plan B?

[Lees]

In my recent study of Bible prophecy and some parables in the book of (Matthew) a certain truth , I believe, came to me that I hadn't recognized before, though the Scriptures that reveal that truth I have used many times to support various other doctrines.

This revolves around the main question, often asked, what is the main goal of God in His creation and plan of salvation" For, in it's appearance, it is always as though God is frustrated at times with Satan's victories and having to opt for a plan B. For example, Adam and Eve in the Garden who failed and cast all of humanity into sin. Or, the Flood of Noah whereby God would start over again. Or, God creating the nation Israel, who equally failed and eventually killed the Son of God, whereby God created the Church.

But, God is God. And He knows all. There are no surprises with God. He never reacts, He acts. But God reveals Himself and His work to man in a way man can understand. And in so doing presents Himself as with human reactions. For example, we are told God is not like a man in that He does not repent. (Num. 23:19) But then He displayed repentance. (EX. 32: 14) Doing this to teach us the importance of advocacy and prayer. (Ex. 32:11-14) It is this way throughout the Scripture, moving towards the goal of God in creation. (Acts 15:18) "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world."

Of course it is true that when the hand of God moves to do something, He is never doing just one thing. By our observance it may be just be one act, but that one act will affect what He is doing with the angels, or spirit world, or the salvation of individuals or of Israel or the Gentiles or the Church.

I haven't yet got to what I wanted to say but I can see the post would be too long to do so. But these questions can be considered. In all that God does, is there anything more important to Him than another? Or, applied to the love of God, does God love some of His children more than others? Emphasis on 'His children'. Not those who are not. For example, Did God love Moses more than Lot?


Lees

 

[Albion]

...a certain truth , I believe, came to me that I hadn't recognized before, though the Scriptures that reveal that truth I have used many times to support various other doctrines.

This revolves around the main question, often asked, what is the main goal of God in His creation and plan of salvation" For, in it's appearance, it is always as though God is frustrated at times with Satan's victories and having to opt for a plan B. For example, Adam and Eve in the Garden who failed and cast all of humanity into sin. Or, the Flood of Noah whereby God would start over again. Or, God creating the nation Israel, who equally failed and eventually killed the Son of God, whereby God created the Church.

But, God is God. And He knows all. There are no surprises with God. He never reacts, He acts. But God reveals Himself and His work to man in a way man can understand. And in so doing presents Himself as with human reactions.

The second view is most likely on target. God does know all, just as you said. That means it is not likely that he has been thwarted in his eternal planning by either group of his own creatures, Men or fallen Angels.

But we can appreciate the story line that's revealed through the Old Testament and in the Gospels, which is that he has gradually unfolded his eternal objectives through all those events in celestial and human history, thus providing us with a basis for the final outcome.

If we try for a few minutes to make sense of our faults, a possible reconciliation with God, and of God as both merciful and just...it would hardly make sense to us mortals without the full 'script' we have been given, i.e. the Bible.

 

[Lees]

I, as a dispensationalist, recognize the various times, ages, and dispensations that God uses in history to reveal what He is doing. And so I recognize the importance of Israel, to whom are the covenants and promises made, by which God performs the salvation to all. (Eph. 2:12) And I recognize the place of Israel as the leading nation on earth when God establishes the Kingdom reign. Jesus Christ their King will rule.

Sometimes in defending these truths, which is common as there are believers who disagree, it appears as though more importance is given to Israel then the Church. The Church being a product of Israel's rejection of her Messiah and God turning to the Gentiles. One of those plan B's. And there is so much Scripture that reveals how God will be faithful to Israel and establish her in the Kingdom. One could say all of the Old Testament.

In other words, because God established Israel first, and worked out from there His salvation, and then later would create the Church, (Matt. 16:18), and later yet re-establish Israel to fulfill His promises, (Rom. 9-11), the appearance is that the Church is but a by-product of what God is doing with Israel.

Some may disagree, but I have recognized this trait in myself. Which provoked my questions in post #(1). Are there things more important to God than other things?

Lees

 

[Messy]

For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has [h]committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.

33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!

34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has become His counselor?”
35 “Or who has first given to Him
And it shall be repaid to him?”

 

[Messy]

In all that God does, is there anything more important to Him than another? Or, applied to the love of God, does God love some of His children more than others? Emphasis on 'His children'. Not those who are not. For example, Did God love Moses more than Lot?


Lees

No but He had a better relationship with Moses and Lot only got saved thanks to Abraham who couldn't get kids, so he saw his nephew as his son.

God has a plan to save the elect. If man doesnt cooperate He knows that already and He planned to have Jesus die before He even created the earth. I wonder if the non elect are His perfect plan. I don't think so, although it says He made everything for His pleasure, because He also says: an enemy did that. He fulfills His plan and just uses those who go against Him for good.

 

[Lees]

This line of thinking started with me a few days ago when I was looking at (Matt. 22:1-14) and the parable of the marriage feast. And (Matt. 22:2) says, "The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son."

In this parable, God the Father is certainly the King and the Son is Jesus Christ. My question became 'when' did the Father make a marriage for His Son? Not just when does it occur in time, as God does all things at exactly His time, (Gal. 4:4), but when did this plan of a marriage for the Son form in God's mind? Did it occur only after and because of Israel rejected the Son?

In (Matt. 25:34) we see that the Kingdom which is to come on earth of which Israel will be the leading nation, was in the plan of God 'from' the foundation of the world. And we see that Jesus Christ is slain 'from' the foundation of the world. But, we see in (Eph. 1:4-6) that the Church is chosen 'before' the foundation of the world.

Now, if the Church is the Bride of Jesus Christ, which it is, (Eph. 5:30-32), and the Church is chosen before the foundation of the world, then, to me, this means the marriage made by the Father for the Son, had to be in His plan before His Kingdom plans on earth with Israel.

In other words, the Church is not a plan B. The Church is the plan. A Bride for His Son. A marriage for His Son. Which would mean all that went before in the Old Testament is in preparation for that.

And do we not see the culmination of this at the very end of the revealed Word of God? (Rev. 19:7-9) "...for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready..."

(Rev. 21:9) "...I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife."

(Rev. 22:17) "And the Spirit and the bride say Come." It is the Holy Spirit and the Bride in unison speaking. An amazing statement to me.

Lees

 

[Lees]

He always wanted everyone saved who can be saved. Abraham was the only one He could work with. He's not a respecter of persons. Jesus descended from some gentiles. Elijah went to a non Jewish widow. God wanted to use them to save the world. He stretched out His hands day and night, but they did not want. Then He went to the gentiles and there was always a remnant. He then wanted to use the gentiles to get Israel back, but a lot of them were jealous and rather killed them, like some dumb 2nd partner who's jealous and doesn't understand that of course you want your ex back. Let alone the kids from the ex. What do they even think? That God only cares about His new family like a deadbeat dad and just dumps the others?
It's just like with Joseph. His brothers didn't want him and the Egyptians did and everyone got saved.

God is not a human with 2 wives who have to be jealous. He got rid of the middle wall of seperation and the wedding of the Lamb is with one bride, not 2. He makes the 2 one.
The LORD will save the tents of Judah first, so that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall not become greater than that of Judah.

For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has [h]committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.

33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!

34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has become His counselor?”
35 “Or who has first given to Him
And it shall be repaid to him?”

Yes, God has always planned on saving Jews and Gentiles. And all who were saved from Adam to Moses were predominately Gentiles. But once God established a nation of His own, Israel, salvation was to found only in Israel. (John 4:22) "...for salvation is of the Jews"

I never said God has two wives. Getting rid of the wall of separation created a new body, the Church, made up of Jew and Gentile, but predominately Gentile. That is the Bride, the Lambs wife. The Lambs wife is not the Fathers wife. The Father made a marriage for His Son. God the Father has a wife, Israel. (Is. 54:5-6) (Jer. 3:14) She is presently divorced from the Father. (Jer. 3:8) God the Son, the Man Christ Jesus, has a Bride, the Church.

Lees

 

[Messy]

-

 

[Lees]

This parable in (Matt. 22:1-14) concerns the marriage the King made for His Son. And more importantly, to the marriage feast attached to that wedding. (22:4) "I have prepared my dinner" And the King sent out invitations to supply 'guests' to the wedding feast. (22:10) "and the wedding was furnished with guests." This same parable is found in (Luke 14:15-24) though it is not as extensive as in (Matt. 22).

It is often said when trying to interpret parables in Scripture that you shouldn't try and make them walk on all fours. And, I suppose there is some truth to that. But, they do need to walk. So the King must represent God the Father. The Son must represent Jesus Christ. The marriage must be that between Jesus Christ and the Church.

Now, in this parable the servants of the King are going out with invitations to provide guests for the wedding feast. There is a difference between a 'guest' and the 'Bride'. The Bride is not a guest at her wedding or wedding feast.

And in this parable, the Bride, the Church, is not front and center. We know there is a Bride because there is a wedding and feast. The Father's invitation to the guests and their response seems to be the focus of this parable. So an important question is, 'who are the guests?'.

Lees

 

[Messy]

I have never understood that and assumed it otherwise didn't work with the parable if He invited everyone to marry Him, men, women, children, loads of them, everyone actually. That only works when it's Jesus marrying. It also says the land is married. That's clearly about Israel.

Isaiah 62
You shall no longer be termed Forsaken,[b]
Nor shall your land any more be termed Desolate;[c]
But you shall be called [d]Hephzibah (Dutch translation says My Delight), and your land [e]Beulah (Dutch says Married);
For the Lord delights in you,
And your land shall be married.

John the Baptist called himself the friend of the bridegroom, but if you ask me he's also the bride.

 

[Lees]

I have never understood that and assumed it otherwise didn't work with the parable if He invited everyone to marry Him, men, women, children, loads of them, everyone actually. That only works when it's Jesus marrying. It also says the land is married. That's clearly about Israel.

Isaiah 62
You shall no longer be termed Forsaken,[b]
Nor shall your land any more be termed Desolate;[c]
But you shall be called [d]Hephzibah (Dutch translation says My Delight), and your land [e]Beulah (Dutch says Married);
For the Lord delights in you,
And your land shall be married.

John the Baptist called himself the friend of the bridegroom, but if you ask me he's also the bride.

It certainly has it's difficulties.

But as said, we know the King is God the Father. We know Jesus is the Son for whom the marriage is for. We know the Church is the Bride of Christ, so the marriage in view here is between Christ and the Church.

I believe Israel does play a role in this parable but the Church is left out of it because the Bride is never the guests. And this parable centers on the guests.

Personally I would not say that John the Baptist is part of the Church. As the Church, in my view, didn't begin until Pentecost. (Acts 2) Whenever that wedding day does occur, I do believe that John the Baptist is, as you pointed out, the friend of the bridegroom, or in other words, the best man. (John 3:29)

And then, on that great wedding day there is one appointed to give the Bride away. (2 Cor. 11:2) "For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." Paul.

In this parable, (Matt. 22) the Father sends His servants to carry the invitations for the guests. (22:3) "And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding." Is 'the call' here the same thing as 'the bidden'? I'm inclined to say no. These guests were bidden, I believe, at an earlier time. They would wait till the call came to come to the wedding.

'Them that were bidden', I believe, represents Israel in the Old Testament looking for the Kingdom to come and the Messiah. For it will be at that time, when the Millennial Kingdom comes, that the wedding feast for the Son will take place.

'The Call' I believe, is done by John the Baptist, and his disciples, and Christ's disciples, in preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom. They are the 'servants' in (Matt. 22:3) "And sent forth his servants to call them" But, as (22:3) says, "they would not come" (John 1:11) "He came unto his own, and his own received him not."

Lees

 

[Lees]

(Matt. 22:1-3) So the first invitation was to Israel in the Old Testament. 'Them that were bidden'. (22:3) Later the call came that the wedding is ready. And it's time for Israel to come. That would be the preaching of the Kingdom by John the Baptist, his disciples, and Christ's disciples, and Christ Himself. (22:3) But Israel refused and would not come. The result of that refusal was the death of Christ, His Resurrection, and Asscension to the Father.

(Matt. 22:4) "Again, he sent forth other servants saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold , I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage."

This is another call to Israel after Christ's death and Resurrection for Israel to come, by 'other servants'. And, I believe that is found at the time of Pentacost and afterward. Immediately following the coming of the Holy Spirit, (Acts 2:1-13), Peter addressed Israel. (Acts 2:14) "...Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words.". He went on to explain the coming of the Holy Spirit and laid the full blame of Christ's death upon the house of Israel. (Acts 2:36) "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."

This got the Jews worried and they replied, "what shall we do". (Acts 2:37) And Peter said, "Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Repent and be baptized is the same as the Kingdom Gospel. (Matt. 3:1-6) The message to the nation Israel is always to repent first because they were always in a rebellious state. And many Jews did believe, but not the nation. (Acts 2:41)

Once again Peter addresses the nation Israel. (Acts 3: 12) "And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel...." And once again he accused Israel and laid the blame of Christ at their feet. (13-18) And he then said, "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;"

Peter goes on to show how that Old Testament Israel are the 'them that were bidden' spoken of in (Matt. 22:3) See (Acts 3:22-26) "...Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days." (3:24)

Back to the parable in (Matthew). (Matt. 22:5-6) "But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise. And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them."

And that is exactly how Israel treated this latest offer of repentance. (Acts 4:3) (4:18) (4:21) (5:17-18) (5:40) This would later result in Stephens death as he, as Peter, revealed to the leaders of Israel, how they had always been rebellious against God. And their rebellion against the Son of God was proof that they were just like the Israel of old. (Acts 7:1-59) Just like their fathers.

Lees

 

[Lees]

(Matt. 22:7) "But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city."

This shows the justness of God in destroying Jerusalem by the Roman armies in 70 A.D. Even after Christ had been slain and risen, another offer had been given to Israel to repent. Yet they once again refused. They were not worthy. (Matt. 22:8) "Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy."

(Matt. 22:9-10) "Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests."

Once again, this invitation is going out to provide 'guests' to the wedding. It is not to provide a Bride for the Bridegroom. Thus it can't be the gospel message of today which is still adding to the Church, the Bride. And in a future day, during the 7 year Tribulation, the Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached unto all nations. (Matt. 24:14) "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." It is this I believe, that (Matt. 22:9-10) is referring to.

It is interesting to me the phrase in (22:10), "as many as they found both bad and good". In other words the guests at the wedding would possibly be both bad and good, and come from all over the world. (Matt. 24:14)

Lees

 

[Messy]

(Matt. 22:7) "But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city."

This shows the justness of God in destroying Jerusalem by the Roman armies in 70 A.D. Even after Christ had been slain and risen, another offer had been given to Israel to repent. Yet they once again refused. They were not worthy. (Matt. 22:8) "Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy."

(Matt. 22:9-10) "Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests."

Once again, this invitation is going out to provide 'guests' to the wedding. It is not to provide a Bride for the Bridegroom. Thus it can't be the gospel message of today which is still adding to the Church, the Bride. And in a future day, during the 7 year Tribulation, the Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached unto all nations. (Matt. 24:14) "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." It is this I believe, that (Matt. 22:9-10) is referring to.

It is interesting to me the phrase in (22:10), "as many as they found both bad and good". In other words the guests at the wedding would possibly be both bad and good, and come from all over the world. (Matt. 24:14)

Lees

I think it's about both. It clearly is about them then who rejected Him and the destruction of Jerusalem, but you see the same thing happening today, a falling away from christians, who are only busy with buying houses, marrying and all that nonsense.

 

[Lees]

I think it's about both. It clearly is about them then who rejected Him and the destruction of Jerusalem, but you see the same thing happening today, a falling away from christians, who are only busy with buying houses, marrying and all that nonsense.

We certainly can see the failures and falling away of the Church today. And we have plenty of Scripture that support such a falling away will take place in the Church's latter days. (2 Thess. 2:1-7) (Luke 18:8) And at the end of the Church age, represented by the luke warm Church of Laodicea, Christ is on the outside knocking, inviting those that are within to come out where He now is. Sad picture for sure. (Rev. 3:16,20)

But, I believe it's important to see that this parable in (Matt. 22) is not about the Church. I realize it is commonly used as being the Church to encourage believers to go out into the highways and byways and evangelize. The point is we have plenty of other Scripture to support that without using Scripture that is not speaking to the Church. The Church cannot be both Bride and guests.

And if one persists that this parable does speak to the Church, then you have the problem with a man being part of the Bride who does not belong. (Matt. 22:11-14) Which is then used by many to show that, at worst, a believer in the Church can lose his salvation, or at the least, a believer can never know for sure till that day.

Lees

 

[Lees]

In (Matt. 22:11-14) there are several questions I have.

This invitation is called a 'call' to the wedding feast. (22:3) This call went out to anyone they could find, good or bad. (22:9-10) But then the King chastizes one who doesn't have on a wedding garment. This is the first we hear about a wedding garment. And we know this one was called, because of (22:14). "many are called, but few are chosen".

In other words, the call didn't go out to those only with a wedding garment. It went out to anyone, good or bad. So, a couple of questions here. 1.) Why make a call for anyone to come when only certain ones can come? (Matt. 22:12) And 2.) What is the wedding garment?

The King then orders the man bound and cast into 'outer darkness'. (Matt. 22:13) So, my question #3) is, what is 'outer darkness'? Hell or the Lake of Fire? That is hard to imagine since fire produces light not darkness.

The only time in Scripture 'outer darkness' is spoken of is in (Matthew). (8:12) (22:13) (25:30) Just like the term 'kingdom of heaven' is only found in (Matthew). (Matthew) is the book on the Kingdom. That Kingdom of God upon the earth. It is not Heaven. It is Heaven on earth. So I'm thinking this term 'outer darkness' must speak to something during that Kingdom rule upon the earth.

Lees

 

[Messy]

In (Matt. 22:11-14) there are several questions I have.

This invitation is called a 'call' to the wedding feast. (22:3) This call went out to anyone they could find, good or bad. (22:9-10) But then the King chastizes one who doesn't have on a wedding garment. This is the first we hear about a wedding garment. And we know this one was called, because of (22:14). "many are called, but few are chosen".

In other words, the call didn't go out to those only with a wedding garment. It went out to anyone, good or bad. So, a couple of questions here. 1.) Why make a call for anyone to come when only certain ones can come? (Matt. 22:12) And 2.) What is the wedding garment?

The King then orders the man bound and cast into 'outer darkness'. (Matt. 22:13) So, my question #3) is, what is 'outer darkness'? Hell or the Lake of Fire? That is hard to imagine since fire produces light not darkness.

The only time in Scripture 'outer darkness' is spoken of is in (Matthew). (8:12) (22:13) (25:30) Just like the term 'kingdom of heaven' is only found in (Matthew). (Matthew) is the book on the Kingdom. That Kingdom of God upon the earth. It is not Heaven. It is Heaven on earth. So I'm thinking this term 'outer darkness' must speak to something during that Kingdom rule upon the earth.

Lees

1. Because it is for everyone and they can reject it. They had to preach the Gospel to every creature.
2. The white linen of Revelation.

The Dead Church​

3 “And to the [a]angel of the church in Sardis write,

‘These things says He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: “I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead. 2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die, for I have not found your works perfect before [b]God. 3 Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. 4 [c]You have a few names [d]even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy. 5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

And Laodicea

17 Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked— 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed

Jude 1:23​

23 but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.


3. There is no light in hell. Ian McCormack said it was pitch black.

 

[Messy]

We certainly can see the failures and falling away of the Church today. And we have plenty of Scripture that support such a falling away will take place in the Church's latter days. (2 Thess. 2:1-7) (Luke 18:8) And at the end of the Church age, represented by the luke warm Church of Laodicea, Christ is on the outside knocking, inviting those that are within to come out where He now is. Sad picture for sure. (Rev. 3:16,20)

But, I believe it's important to see that this parable in (Matt. 22) is not about the Church. I realize it is commonly used as being the Church to encourage believers to go out into the highways and byways and evangelize. The point is we have plenty of other Scripture to support that without using Scripture that is not speaking to the Church. The Church cannot be both Bride and guests.

And if one persists that this parable does speak to the Church, then you have the problem with a man being part of the Bride who does not belong. (Matt. 22:11-14) Which is then used by many to show that, at worst, a believer in the Church can lose his salvation, or at the least, a believer can never know for sure till that day.

Lees

That is just what calvinists call: he was never really saved. The dead church, the lukewarm church.
I don't see how the church can't be both. It's just a parable about a bridegroom and a bride, so I think that's why they're called guests. Paul says the church is the bride.
By the way it never made sense to me to say the invitation for the wedding was when Jesus was on earth, because they said the wedding is now and everything was ready? It would take another 2000 years. But then I was thinking: if they had all said yes that would be it. He would have married and stayed.

 

[Messy]

Yes, God has always planned on saving Jews and Gentiles. And all who were saved from Adam to Moses were predominately Gentiles. But once God established a nation of His own, Israel, salvation was to found only in Israel. (John 4:22) "...for salvation is of the Jews"

I never said God has two wives. Getting rid of the wall of separation created a new body, the Church, made up of Jew and Gentile, but predominately Gentile. That is the Bride, the Lambs wife. The Lambs wife is not the Fathers wife. The Father made a marriage for His Son. God the Father has a wife, Israel. (Is. 54:5-6) (Jer. 3:14) She is presently divorced from the Father. (Jer. 3:8) God the Son, the Man Christ Jesus, has a Bride, the Church.

Lees

Israel was the Father's wife, but God is one. Jesus comes to earth. First Abraham etc. get raised from the dead. Then the rapture. Then the uncountable multitude. A married couple lives together. Jesus comes live here on earth. Abraham etc. will be on earth too. He's not part of the bride because they were already married to God? Hmmm. Interesting.

 

[Lees]

1. Because it is for everyone and they can reject it. They had to preach the Gospel to every creature.
2. The white linen of Revelation.

The Dead Church​

3 “And to the [a]angel of the church in Sardis write,

‘These things says He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: “I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead. 2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die, for I have not found your works perfect before [b]God. 3 Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. 4 [c]You have a few names [d]even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy. 5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

And Laodicea

17 Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked— 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed

Jude 1:23​

23 but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.


3. There is no light in hell. Ian McCormack said it was pitch black.

But, my point is, the man did not reject the call. He responded, but didn't have the wedding garment. (Matt. 22:14)

Again, this is not about being part of the Bride. It is about being a guest at the wedding feast. What you present belongs to the Bride.

As far as 'Ian McCormack'...who is he?

Lees